From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 10ad19,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10ad19,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: 107a89,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid107a89,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-08 07:20:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!news.maxwell.syr.edu!npeer.kpnqwest.net!lnewspeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewspeer01.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!do.de.uu.net!feeder01.news.de.uu.net!news-1.bank.dresdner.net!not-for-mail From: James Kanze Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.clarion,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml Subject: Re: Long names are doom ? Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 16:06:11 +0200 Organization: Dresdner Bank AG Message-ID: <3B20DBD3.69D98324@dresdner-bank.com> References: <83WP6.3874$yc6.728572@news.xtra.co.nz> <+FWVg+noA0yk@eisner.encompasserve.org> <9fjfc4$qdv$1@news.fsu.edu> <9fjkha$re7$1@bugstomper.ihug.com.au> <9fkp2m$9gn$1@bugstomper.ihug.com.au> <5d083b27.0106070216.274829f6@posting.google.com> Reply-To: default@dresdner-bank.com NNTP-Posting-Host: ffzj09tz.bank.dresdner.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD drebazen10 (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en,fr,de Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8407 comp.lang.awk:2899 comp.lang.clarion:21440 comp.lang.java.programmer:74761 comp.lang.pl1:904 comp.lang.vrml:3642 Date: 2001-06-08T16:06:11+02:00 List-Id: Jonathan Revusky wrote: > I didn't actually care so much about calls via reflection being > slower (though I guess they must be and it is also something to > worry about... a bit) but my concern was the tendency for the code > to be very difficult to read or maintain. Not to mention that it means that all of the compiler type checking is moved off to runtime. > I think there is a tendency for the C hackers moving to Java to > overuse reflection (once they discover it) because things like > java.lang.reflect.Method can map perfectly in their minds to a C > function pointer. Except that most real C hackers don't use function pointers, either. Most often, I've seen monster switches or a chain of if's. > Also, the C hackers aren't usually familiar enough with OO patterns > to realize that you don't really need function pointers like that in > Java. (Or at least hardly ever.) In C, the use of the function > pointers also leads to very obfuscated, hard-to-maintain code, but > that's really unavoidable. AFAICS it's the only way you get > polymorphism in C. As with many things, used correctly, function pointers can actually improve readability. -- James Kanze mailto:kanze@gabi-soft.de Conseils en informatique orient�e objet/ Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung Ziegelh�ttenweg 17a, 60598 Frankfurt, Germany Tel. +49(069)63198627